Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field

Apoptosis of tumor-infiltrating T lymphocytes: a new immune checkpoint mechanism

Immunotherapy based on checkpoint inhibitors is providing substantial clinical benefit, but only to a minority of cancer patients. The current priority is to understand why the majority of patients fail to respond. Besides T-cell dysfunction, T-cell apoptosis was reported in several recent studies as a relevant mechanism of tumoral immune resistance. Several death receptors (Fas, DR3, DR4, DR5, TNFR1) can trigger apoptosis when activated by their respective ligands. In this review, we discuss the immunomodulatory role of the main death receptors and how these are shaping the tumor microenvironment, with a focus on Fas and its ligand. Fas-mediated apoptosis of T cells has long been known as a mechanism allowing the contraction of T-cell responses to prevent immunopathology, a phenomenon known as activation-induced cell death, which is triggered by induction of Fas ligand (FasL) expression on T cells themselves and qualifies as an immune checkpoint mechanism. Recent evidence indicates that other cells in the tumor microenvironment can express FasL and trigger apoptosis of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL), including endothelial cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. The resulting disappearance of TIL prevents anti-tumor immunity and may in fact contribute to the absence of TIL that is typical of “cold” tumors that fail to respond to immunotherapy. Interfering with the Fas–FasL pathway in the tumor microenvironment has the potential to increase the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy

Maternal and neonatal outcomes after caesarean delivery in the African Surgical Outcomes Study: a 7-day prospective observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Maternal and neonatal mortality is high in Africa, but few large, prospective studies have been done to investigate the risk factors associated with these poor maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: A 7-day, international, prospective, observational cohort study was done in patients having caesarean delivery in 183 hospitals across 22 countries in Africa. The inclusion criteria were all consecutive patients (aged ≥18 years) admitted to participating centres having elective and non-elective caesarean delivery during the 7-day study cohort period. To ensure a representative sample, each hospital had to provide data for 90% of the eligible patients during the recruitment week. The primary outcome was in-hospital maternal mortality and complications, which were assessed by local investigators. The study was registered on the South African National Health Research Database, number KZ_2015RP7_22, and on ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03044899. FINDINGS: Between February, 2016, and May, 2016, 3792 patients were recruited from hospitals across Africa. 3685 were included in the postoperative complications analysis (107 missing data) and 3684 were included in the maternal mortality analysis (108 missing data). These hospitals had a combined number of specialist surgeons, obstetricians, and anaesthetists totalling 0·7 per 100 000 population (IQR 0·2-2·0). Maternal mortality was 20 (0·5%) of 3684 patients (95% CI 0·3-0·8). Complications occurred in 633 (17·4%) of 3636 mothers (16·2-18·6), which were predominantly severe intraoperative and postoperative bleeding (136 [3·8%] of 3612 mothers). Maternal mortality was independently associated with a preoperative presentation of placenta praevia, placental abruption, ruptured uterus, antepartum haemorrhage (odds ratio 4·47 [95% CI 1·46-13·65]), and perioperative severe obstetric haemorrhage (5·87 [1·99-17·34]) or anaesthesia complications (11·47 (1·20-109·20]). Neonatal mortality was 153 (4·4%) of 3506 infants (95% CI 3·7-5·0). INTERPRETATION: Maternal mortality after caesarean delivery in Africa is 50 times higher than that of high-income countries and is driven by peripartum haemorrhage and anaesthesia complications. Neonatal mortality is double the global average. Early identification and appropriate management of mothers at risk of peripartum haemorrhage might improve maternal and neonatal outcomes in Africa. FUNDING: Medical Research Council of South Africa.Medical Research Council of South Africa